I. INTRODUCTION
The design of ESR staging is of prime importance as it is Fig. 1: ESR Staging Line Plan.
the main cause of failure in most of the cases. So the
adverse effects due to natural calamities like earthquake or
cyclone need to be given due consideration. Seismic force III. PROBLEM FORMULATION
considered to be acting at the center of mass of tank, due In order to find out the governing load case Nine tanks of
to the heavy mass at top in ESR and it acts at mid height of capacity 20 m 3 to 100 m 3 have considered in this paper
container. Wind force varies with height of tank, so those with staging height 12m. Three types of soil: Soft, Medium,
are applied at the center of each bracing level and at And Hard are considered, and depth of foundation is varied
center of container. To determine the governing load case i.e. 3m (Soft), 2.5m (medium) & 2m (hard). So now totally
equivalent point load for wind loading is calculated and 27 tanks are analyzed in SAP-2000 to obtain Stiffness for
then compared with seismic forces. This comparison is calculation of wind and earthquake forces. Static Wind
used to indicate predominant Load case i.e. earthquake or forces have been calculated when frequency > 1 Hz, in
wind. remaining cases dynamic wind forces have been
calculated. Dynamic wind force can be calculated by IS
II. EQUIVALENT POINT LOAD FOR THREE PANEL
875-1987 (Part III) & IS 875 draft (Part III). However in this
To calculate equivalent point load (P eqv) moment at top of paper IS 875-1987 (Part III) code is used. Seismic forces are
foundation level is considered (Refer Fig .1). calculated as per IS 1893 (Part I & II).
Moment due to Wind Load at base
2H H
Mb W H a W 1 a W 1 a
3 3
(1)
A. Moment due to Point Load at base
Mb Peqv H a
(2)
I: Data of ESR
Capacity Di Hw Roof beam Tbs
(m3) (m) (m) (mm) (mm)
177
Annexure IX
B D
20 4.04 1.6 - - 200
30 4.04 2.4 - - 200
40 4.75 2.3 250 525 200
50 5.45 2.2 250 525 200
60 5.45 2.6 250 525 200
70 5.45 3.05 250 525 225
80 6.16 2.75 250 525 250
90 6.16 3.05 250 525 250
100 6.16 3.4 250 525 250
178
Annexure IX
179
Annexure IX
180
Annexure IX
V. CONCLUSION
Based on above study, following are few conclusions.
VI. NOMENCLATURE
REFERENCES
181